|
Can you point out a track record of provable lies by Snowden prior to the NBC interview? Because the NSA has quite a few, even accounting for their absurd definition of "collect."
Elotana fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Jun 1, 2014 |
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
I think it'd be one thing if they only posted one email and hid the fact the others existed, and I thought about that as something that could happen. But then they stated it was the only email he'd ever sent about it, which seems reckless to say as if they did exist and he also did have copies of those emails, which I'm sure they would have to suspect he would, they would find themselves in an even worse situation for now attempting to cover it up and having openly lied to the public and they'd lose any vestige of credibility they could ever claim to have again. While there's no legal proceedings that would bring in obstruction of justice, I personally just don't see how that could be a good move unless they were sure that he either didn't have a copy of the other emails or if he never sent them in the first place. You have to think it is a little strange that he wouldn't have printed them out, or taken them with him, to prove that he did what he claims he was trying to do. Hell, I print out emails when I'm just trying to get utilities fixed in my apartment to prove I've been complaining about it for months.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
To take a step back, I don't think this line of reasoning makes any sense at all. What you're saying seems to be tantamount to "If he's so trustworthy compared to the NSA, why didn't he hack the NSA legal office email servers and get the email archives from 4 years prior when he first started having concerns working for another department but hadn't yet decided to leak?" None of the Snowden documents we've seen has been an email. Private personal emails are stored on separate systems from documents meant for internal sharing. It's entirely reasonable to expect that emails weren't accessible to his spider that crawled through network shares of file storage systems. For us, the public, to actually see everything Snowden voiced internally would take a congressional or presidential order for the NSA to produce it, and then it would have to be declassified. And then the NSA would actually have to comply (given that they face potential criminal liability from the content of it, they have every incentive to simply "lose" it). Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems wholly unreasonable to put the burden on Snowden here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:To take a step back, I don't think this line of reasoning makes any sense at all. What you're saying seems to be tantamount to "If he's so trustworthy compared to the NSA, why didn't he hack the NSA legal office email servers and get the email archives from 4 years prior when he first started having concerns working for another department but hadn't yet decided to leak?" He'd have the emails on his personal outlook in his sent folder. There's no age-off of emails, he'd always have had access to them. I just think that it's weird if he knew he'd rely on proving that the government blatantly ignored these issues when he mentioned them that you'd want to be able to prove it and the easiest way would have been access to those emails. I don't trust either side implicitly, but I know he would have had access to emails from the time he started working there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Analogical posted:I think it'd be one thing if they only posted one email and hid the fact the others existed, and I thought about that as something that could happen. But then they stated it was the only email he'd ever sent about it, which seems reckless to say as if they did exist and he also did have copies of those emails, which I'm sure they would have to suspect he would, they would find themselves in an even worse situation for now attempting to cover it up and having openly lied to the public and they'd lose any vestige of credibility they could ever claim to have again. quote:NSA has now explained that they have found one email inquiry by Edward Snowden to the Office of General Counsel asking for an explanation of some material that was in a training course he had just completed. The e-mail did not raise allegations or concerns about wrongdoing or abuse, but posed a legal question that the Office of General Counsel addressed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Analogical posted:He'd have the emails on his personal outlook in his sent folder. There's no age-off of emails, he'd always have had access to them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:Are you joking? I'm not. All government emails are official record and aren't aged off. Unless he deleted them from his profile they would be in there, and at the moment knowing that I'm confused how he wouldn't take those with him so this wasn't a debate at all when it did come up. Especially if he goes to court those would be vital documents and it'd be better for everyone if Snowden had his copies of it and the NSA had theirs. Granted the NSA would probably alter their version and then it'd be an argument about who edited whose records.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Analogical posted:I'm not. All government emails are official record and aren't aged off. Unless he deleted them from his profile they would be in there, and at the moment knowing that I'm confused how he wouldn't take those with him so this wasn't a debate at all when it did come up. Especially if he goes to court those would be vital documents and it'd be better for everyone if Snowden had his copies of it and the NSA had theirs. Granted the NSA would probably alter their version and then it'd be an argument about who edited whose records.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:I'm struggling to say this in a way that doesn't sound incredibly condescending, but I think it's strange to assume that the intelligence services have their spies, instructors, and analysts using personal laptops with unsecured email that they get to keep when they get a new job in the private sector. Really all I'm trying to say is that he should have taken copies of those emails if he knew they'd be this important. I do agree with you that I don't trust the NSA's version of that email they released, but I'm also suspect when Snowden didn't hit back with copies of the emails. I kind of expected him to post them as a HA moment once the NSA posted they only had one. Analogical fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Jan 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
Analogical posted:e: Really all I'm trying to say is that he should have taken copies of those emails if he knew they'd be this important. I do agree with you that I don't trust the NSA's version of that email they released, but I'm also suspect when Snowden didn't hit back with copies of the emails. I kind of expected him to post them as a HA moment once the NSA posted they only had one. Even if he had, wouldn't he have deleted them with everything else before heading to Russia?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
^exactlyAnalogical posted:
If you read Greenwald's book, Snowden originally was just totally certain that he was going to prison after releasing the documents. He was sure that he was headed for prison and took steps to make sure that he wouldn't look like something other than what he is. He stayed in a very public, pricey hotel in HK when he originally met with Greenwald. He didn't want to give anyone a reason to say he was hiding out or that he was some kind of double agent. And his NBC interview from the other night indicated that he destroyed all copies of secret documents and all access he had before he went to Russia (i.e when he was in HK.) This guy was laying down his life. He was totally sure he was headed for some secret supermax prison. And even if he had the emails before he'd have destroyed them and all of his access to them before heading for Russia so as not to be a walking target. AARO fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Jun 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:Even if he had, wouldn't he have deleted them with everything else before heading to Russia? He gave everything to the Guardian originally and says he deleted what he had on him when he got into Russia to avoid Russian pressure. Those emails of non-action would be a goldmine for the media to have though. If he had done that, they would be with the Guardian or whoever else he distributed the files to I imagine
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
I haven't been following his claims but what exactly did Snowden claim regarding his not just being an it janitor but being a proper spy as well?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Analogical posted:He gave everything to the Guardian originally and says he deleted what he had on him when he got into Russia to avoid Russian pressure. Those emails of non-action would be a goldmine for the media to have though. If he had done that, they would be with the Guardian or whoever else he distributed the files to I imagine I'm sure it'd be nice to see all that, but in the end it's just another way of shooting the messenger. Snowden could be a Russian agent for all I care, it doesn't take away from the fact that the NSA is completely out of control, doesn't believe it is subject to any meaningful form of oversight, and has totally abdicated its defensive mission.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
A useful trick for derailing a thread is to make a post on a different subject with an obvious error. People will be so quick to pounce on your 'mistake' that the original subject of the thread gets lost. As for the actual subject of the thread, has there been any confirmation that the next leak is definitely a list of people who have been spied on? So far I've seen a bunch of people talking about the rumour, but no confirmation from anyone who actually has the files.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Hey Analogical, do you work at an NSA place for the Navy? If you do can you give us any insight about how actual people feel about Snowden and his leaks? Like, Im super curious if any average workers are sympathetic to him, or if a ton of people dont believe what he has leaked really has any significance, or do you all believe he's just a lying whiney traitor, or what?
treasured8elief fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Jun 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Analogical posted:It's alright. All his emails are on a roaming profile that are independent of his status as a contractor or a civilian. When he worked at Booz vice if he worked at the CIA or NSA as a DoD civilian it's just a matter of his internal record dictating what kind of employee he is. He'd have the same outlook/MS profile, and as they don't age off, going back to work in the agency again would mean he still has everything that was there when he left it. He would have emailed the OGC from work, and the released email does show that, which is a separate network and he couldn't have emailed from a personal laptop or a non-secure network because the nature of what he was bringing issue with is classified. Of course things aren't meant to leave this network, but neither are documents. As soon as he reconnected to the mail server with outlook at a new private sector job he'd have the same token he had before that's employer-agnostic and his emails and files would be restored. Huh. I never would have guessed they would set it up in such an insecure manner. Though you seem to know an awful lot about how the CIA and NSA handle employee accounts! Are, you, perhaps, a current or former employee of an intelligence agency?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
If he is then that makes his first post where he pretends not to be familiar with the concept of a backdoor query on a US person and the center stage role they've played in this controversy REALLY disingenuous. He seems not to be interested in pursuing that line of discussion though 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
tentative8e8op posted:Hey Analogical, do you work at an NSA place for the Navy? If you do can you give us any insight about how actual people feel about Snowden and his leaks? Like, Im super curious if any average workers are sympathetic to him, or if a ton of people dont believe what he has leaked really has any significance, or do you all believe he's just a lying whiney traitor, or what? No, but I work on (roughly) the same DoD backend systems, the way they're handled is standardized for classified networks the same as the Navy uses. As far as insecurity, that's just how the mail system works for fetching old mail you've had/sent DoD-wide. So I'm not sure what the opinion of the agency employees are regarding him. My personal opinion still hasn't landed one way or the other so I'm waiting and watching.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
Im in New Zealand and I can tell you I have slept with a few people who are Five Eyes'ers Any prostitutes or sex workers need to leak what they know about people at the NSA. They are as far as I am concerned the most important reservoirs of information in this battle. These people that expect to be able to spy on everything you do are simultaneously ok with denying you basic healthcare and stigmatising you. LAUNCH CODE GO
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Why don't you start?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Jacobin posted:Im in New Zealand and I can tell you I have slept with a few people who are Five Eyes'ers I'm going to put something out there, and you can counter it if you like: you don't know anything of value. OK, your turn.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
Public service reminder: Please consult an attorney before you leak or blow the whistle on your employer or the government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Why don't you start? Who's to say I haven't already ? Gotta diffuse this poo poo with a lot of noise though or else you become unreasonably targeted as an individual
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
@Analogical: Was it just a coincidence that you created your forum account the day before Snowden flew to Hong Kong?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Elotana posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQqv0v14KKY From the last page, but thanks for this, that talk was fascinating. I had no idea that embedded systems were still being engineered with a 90s security mindset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Can we avoid accusing people of being NSA spies itt please. Or bragging about sleeping with them for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Or bragging about sleeping with them for that matter. What kind of person brags about things they were paid to do :\?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
I'm reading Greenwald's book; one point thats confusing me is their 'legal requirement' to inform the Government when information that may be classified is going to be published, even if the information lacks a clear National security impact. Are there any actual laws that requires news organizations (or random bloggers) to give a heads up, or is this more of a 'just in case' deal? Also, do any of you know if penalties for leaking classified FBI information are comparable to leaking NSA secrets?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
tentative8e8op posted:I'm reading Greenwald's book; one point thats confusing me is their 'legal requirement' to inform the Government when information that may be classified is going to be published, even if the information lacks a clear National security impact. It also seems fairly reasonable from a journalistic ethics standpoint.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Daniel Ellsburg takes John Kerry to task: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/daniel-ellsberg-snowden-fair-trial-kerry-espionage-actquote:More importantly, the current state of whistleblowing prosecutions under the Espionage Act makes a truly fair trial wholly unavailable to an American who has exposed classified wrongdoing. Legal scholars have strongly argued that the US supreme court – which has never yet addressed the constitutionality of applying the Espionage Act to leaks to the American public – should find the use of it overbroad and unconstitutional in the absence of a public interest defense. The Espionage Act, as applied to whistleblowers, violates the First Amendment, is what they're saying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:Publishing classified documents is a crime that they have a public interest defense to fall back on, however I believe that argument works better if people don't get harmed in the process. So giving the government an ultimatum and a last chance to convince them can help keep them in the clear. I was under the impression that only the actual leaking of information to a journalist/blogger was the crime, and that said journalist/blogger who is given/told/finds a secret was under no real legal obligation to keep quiet. Am I horribly wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
The only thing harmed by the leaks was Obama's attempt to sell his administration as something different than the previous one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
tentative8e8op posted:I was under the impression that only the actual leaking of information to a journalist/blogger was the crime, and that said journalist/blogger who is given/told/finds a secret was under no real legal obligation to keep quiet. Am I horribly wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
Jacobin posted:What kind of person brags about things they were paid to do :\? As usual, it is super, super relevant that you're a prostitute.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
This seems the appropriate place for this article. SCOTUS refused to hear Risen's appeal. Gonna be fun when Holder minces his explanation when Risen refuses to testify and gets contempt. "Well he wasn't doing his job, that's what I said." Or just be silent. Another inch closer to the cliff. http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ry.html?hpid=z3
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
BRIT GOV BOFFINS IN MIDDLE EAST SPY SHOCKER!!! http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/03/revealed_beyond_top_secret_british_intelligence_middleeast_internet_spy_base/?page=1 Actually kinda interesting once you tune your reg filters. I wonder exactly what Mr. Miliband is doing for International Rescue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
http://www.wired.com/2014/06/feds-seize-stingray-documents/quote:A routine request in Florida for public records regarding the use of a surveillance tool known as stingray took an extraordinary turn recently when federal authorities seized the documents before police could release them. I think this is on topic. Have documents been seized like this before or is it as unusual as the article states? Any idea why they'd take that step with information about this device?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
Here's another onequote:EFF Tells Court That The NSA Knowingly And Illegally Destroyed Evidence In Key Case Over Bulk Surveillance ShadowHawk fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jun 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Curious why Vodafone took this plunge and opened itself to potential legal action from multiple countries, but holy poo poo (linking due to length and figures): Vodafone reveals existence of secret wires that allow state surveillance Wires allow agencies to listen to or record live conversations, in what privacy campaigners are calling a 'nightmare scenario' I would imagine it's fairly obvious BT is wired to the gills.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2014 03:05
|
|